America Is Purple

The Voice of an American Centrist

America Is Purple header image 2

Teach a man to fish…

December 9th, 2008 · 7 Comments


I read an interview on CNN yesterday where they were talking to what they had decided was the “Republican Barack Obama,” and was struck by something he said.  He said that the Democratic party wanted to give a man a fish, while the Republican party was the party that wanted to teach a man to fish.  An obvious reference to the adage: “Give a man a fish and he’ll eat for a day, teach a man to fish and he will eat for the rest of his life.”  (Trout starvation notwithstanding, I’ve always preferred the parody adage: “Give a man a fire he’ll be warm for a day, set a man on fire and he’ll be warm for the rest of his life.”)  While I don’t doubt that the Republicans favor individuality and self-reliance, I have to admit that the analogy brought two similar thoughts to mind:

 

1) A man stands on the beach, starving.  He hasn’t eaten in days.  A Republican happens by and tells the man, “I have this fish I could give you, but instead I’m going to give you some instruction that will be more helpful to you.  In order to fish, put a hook on your fishing pole, put a worm on the hook, and lower it into the water.  When the fish bites, pull sharply to set the hook and then slowly reel it in.”  The Republican walks away feeling very satisfied that good has been done here.  The starving man looks at the frozen ground devoid of worms and notes his lack of a hook or fishing pole.  He glares at the retreating Republican because he already knew how to fish; he merely lacks the means to do so.

 

2) A fisherman pulls into shore after a long night of fruitless fishing.  Despite his many years as a fisherman, he has not managed to catch any fish.  He comes ashore pondering how he will be able to feed his family since the fish have simply not been biting.  A Republican happens by and tells the man, “I have this fish I could give you, but instead I’m going to give you some instruction that will be more helpful to you.  In order to fish, put a hook on your fishing pole, put a worm on the hook, and lower it into the water.  When the fish bites, pull sharply to set the hook and then slowly reel it in.”  The Republican walks away feeling very satisfied that good has been done here.  The hungry fisherman glares after the retreating Republican because, while he has much more experience and skill at fishing than the advice-giver, he has simply been having a string of bad luck.  The Republican’s advice was of no help whatsoever.

 

A democrat gives each man a fish.  The starving man on the beach eats for a day and needs a fish again tomorrow.  The unlucky fisherman eats for a day and is able to catch a few fish the next day to feed his family.  He limps by.

 

A libertarian believes it is each man’s right to starve and does nothing to help.

 

A communist takes all the fish that were caught in the area and gives each person a fish.  The rest they keep “for emergencies,” but the fish rot.

 

A fascist gives fishing rights only to corporations and declares that if you want to be a fisherman, you have to work for the corporation.

 

Follow up 1) One day a survivalist happens by the starving man, teaches him to make fish-hooks out of twigs and use vines as fishing line.  The man is able to work his way up little by little till he can afford an actual fishing rod and hook and make a meager living as a fisherman, being able to eat most of the time unless the fish aren’t biting. 

 

Follow up 2) One day a scientist develops a fish-sonar.  The unlucky fisherman takes a chance and buys one.  He’s better able to find fish, and his fortune improves.  The sonar quickly pays for itself and the fisherman is better able to provide for his family.

 

Conclusion: The moral of this story is that if you give a man a fish, he’ll eat for a day, you can teach a man to fish and he may still starve, but if you give him the MEANS to fish, he’ll have a much better chance of survival. 

 

The question is, “how can the government possibly know what means people need?”  They really can’t.  So they’re stuck giving either useless advice to “Be self-sufficient!” or hand outs.  While handouts do nothing to help in the long term, they may help some limp by until the fish are biting again.  It’s better than nothing, but does absolutely nothing to help those without the means of self-reliance to gain self-sufficiency.  They will be eternally stuck begging for hand-outs.  A handout to a man who has the means but has run into a string of bad luck may get them through their tough time, but they will be eternally at the mercy of the whims of fate.  Ultimately, it would be nice if we could see beyond the immediate need to give a person what they truly need to thrive, but that is not likely to ever come from the government.  So if our options are to tell people to be self-reliant without aiding them in attaining self-reliance or just give them hand-outs and make them reliant on the government, which is the better option?

 

In a good economy, there are greater possibilities.   The fisherman could get a loan to buy the fish-sonar.  The starving man may be able to get  a job, even if it’s minimum wage.  It is easier to say to people “Be self-sufficient” because there are means available for those willing to work at it to be self-sufficient.  When the economy goes in the tank, there is an overall loss of opportunity and maybe that loan or that job just isn’t available.  Telling people to be self-sufficient in that environment just does not work.  (See election, 2008.)  The question now becomes, “In this era of less do we click back to the opposite extreme of government hand-outs or do we go to the center and work to meet people’s needs by giving them the means to be self-reliant?”

Tags: The Economy

7 responses so far ↓

  • 1 Stacey Derbinshire // Dec 9, 2008 at 11:45 am

    I discovered your homepage by coincidence.
    Very interesting posts and well written.
    I will put your site on my blogroll.
    :-)

  • 2 Matt Boes // Dec 9, 2008 at 3:33 pm

    superb.

  • 3 Don Gooding // Dec 11, 2008 at 1:11 pm

    Allegories are powerful ways to share concepts. But you’ve shown the problem of overly simplistic thinking, which often characterizes The Extremes. Well done!

  • 4 Little John // Jul 8, 2009 at 12:46 am

    At first I thought that you were going to say one way was better then the other, but then you didn’t and you maid me think about it. Therefore, good job on that.

    I work for a loan officer, and I can say that the biggest problem is all of the above.
    The person that does not know how to fish by now is just lazy, or thinks there will always be someone there to take care of them. I have often learned great things from bad teachers. It is up to you to learn.
    Now people that do know how to fish can some times want to look better at fishing then the other Fishermen. Therefore, they go around borrowing other fish to add to the ones they have caught, so they look or feel better. Then the day comes when the fish just are not biting and they do not have enough fish to eat, or to pay back the ones they borrowed before.
    As well, we have the person that loans the fish out, and he is thinking the more fish I loan out the more I will get back in return. Moreover, he over loans to people, so now he must sales the loans he has now, or borrows more fish himself.
    Moving to the Government, we vote for people who think like us, and that will do thing that we want them to do. Then we get mad at them if they do it and it makes things worse. If they do thing we do not like, it just doesn’t matter if it is best we will turn on them.
    I am saying that we must all fish, have a fish handy to give to someone that needs it, and teach people to fish. We need to stop wanting more fish then we can catch, and stop loaning more out then we can handle. We really need to look at our leaders and see to it that the job is done right, and not just them talking about it. We must hold on to what works, and always look for what does not.

  • 5 Views of a centrist. // Aug 17, 2010 at 8:44 pm

    [...] of a centrist. Teach a man to fish… You know, I have to admit that he does have a point there. Excerpted: 1) A man stands on the [...]

  • 6 James // Jan 30, 2012 at 10:54 am

    1 – “lacks the means” How did this happen? Was it by making bad choices? Does he want the means?

    Your Followup 1 is a good outcome scenario. Which group does this typically fall under? Democrats or Republicans?

    I am for a helping hand. I am not for a handout. Politicians use welfare as a tool and a means to control. It is sad, warped out of control to the loss to the poor and economically disadvantaged. When I teach my HS math class, I keep this sad fact in mind. We have 53% low-income students in our district that outscore a regional ‘rich’ district in state assessments.

    I have high expectations for all my students. Note: I do not discuss politics in my class and only tolerate factual discussion (twice a year when we have that elusive extra 5 minutes.)

    I still know in my heart that it is about the children. No arguments by anyone on that point. I feel a lifetime of destitute living is far worse than a starving child for a short time. Let the “big hearted” people provide charity during those times. We do in my family. Put the child-bearing responsibility back on the individual. Make it important to have kids and care for them, do not pay them to have more.

  • 7 admin // Jan 30, 2012 at 4:04 pm

    Follow up 1 is my idea of a best-case scenario for someone who lacks the means and knowledge to get by on their own. It is neither a Democrat nor a Republican idea. It would probably fall under conservative desire for self-sufficiency, except that someone had to teach the man how to be self-sufficient. It is my, no doubt naive, centrist philosophy.

    There are probably other middle-of-the-road common-sense solutions to this type of problem. The Democrat’s ideas tend to be better than Republican ideas in that they only work on paper whereas the Republicans’ ideas don’t even work there. Both sides are more interested in their ideology than finding solutions that actually work.

Leave a Comment